1. The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 100 million to the plaintiff.

A. Defendant B shall be from July 1, 2003 to April 16, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants are married with a couple, and the Defendant C served in accounting in the D Company operated by the Plaintiff.

B. Around December 2002, the Plaintiff remitted the total of KRW 100 million to the account in the name of Defendant B, a partner of Defendant B, and KRW 200 million to the account in the name of F, a de facto spouse of E.

C. On April 20, 2003, E repaid the Plaintiff KRW 100 million out of the above KRW 200 million.

On April 24, 2003, Defendant B prepared and rendered to the Plaintiff a loan certificate (Evidence 1) stating that “I will repay by June 30, 2003, 2003, i.e., borrowed KRW 100 million. I borrowed KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff on February 9, 2009.” The Defendant C prepared and provided cash loan certificate (Evidence 2) stating that “I will repay with the ability. I will repay with the ability.”

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3-1 through 5, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. We examine the determination of the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, and who is the party to the contract is a matter of the party’s intent interpretation involved in the contract.

The interpretation of a declaration of intent is to clearly confirm the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of indicating the intent, and in cases where the contents of a contract are written in writing between the parties to the contract, the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of indicating the intent should be reasonably interpreted according to the contents written, regardless of the parties’ internal intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da5122, Jun. 30, 1995; 200Da27923, Oct. 6, 2000). In such a case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, the existence and content of the declaration of intention shall be recognized as stipulated in the text, barring any special circumstances.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da72572 Decided May 24, 2002, and Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44471 Decided November 29, 2012, etc.). As to the instant case, the health unit and Defendant B on April 2003.